Wednesday, June 10, 2015

Who is your favorite character? Would you be interested at all in a discussion on that on your blog? Maybe you discussed it before but after searching through your posts I couldn't find who you thought your favorite character is.

I think one has to distinguish between the characters as written in the books and the characters in the TV show. For example, I think Roose Bolton is creepy and disgusting in the books, but I rather like him on the show. The former is The Leech, the latter is not.

On the show, easily my favorite figure is Littlefinger, Lord Peter Baelish. He might occasionally overreach himself, but I like his ambition, his ruthlessness, his confidence, and his style. I don't like the Littlefinger of the books as much, as that Littlefinger is more of a self-conscious social-climber who tends to lack the confidence and style of the TV Littlefinger.

In the books, I liked the two Starks, Ned and Robb, although I found their cluelessness about the nature and behavior of evil, untrustworthy men to be as frustrating as it is realistic. I see them in many a conservative who is determined to lose as nobly and graciously as possible. I liked Tywin Lannister of the books and absolutely loved Charles Dance in that role - how could you not - although I found his hatred for Tyrion to be somewhat inexplicable given that he has no other heirs. I also found it highly implausible that he didn't free Jaime from his Kingsguard oath; these are not people who respect oaths, priests, or gods.

The female character I find most attractive is Myranda, the psycho little daughter of the kennelmaster. The female character I most disliked was Caitlyn Stark, in the books and on TV. She was nasty to Jon Snow and kept trying to interfere, ineptly, in things of which she knew nothing. The showrunners were wise to leave her undead version out of the TV show. And the Sansa of the TV show is much more interesting and complex than Martin's Sansa, who appears to exist mostly to absorb Martin's Gamma hate for female innocence and hope.

173 Comments:

You are obviously a patient man.I found the TV series too slow for me. The idea of slogging through books written by that sexually frustated fat dwarf with his take on sexuality given every 24 pages is nauseating.

Not sure I should really exalt the Machiavellian & somewhat sociopathic LittleFinger.Yet, between Aidan Gillen's portrayal of Baelish, his dialog, his overall cunning & the scope & audacity of his schemes.It's difficult to think of any other character more intriguing in the TV show.

I suspect undead Caitlyn will show up next season, they introduced all of the plot points to bring her in. I like how the show is focusing on a handful of characters and the story happening around them. But it has left the viewer strangely uninformed about what's going on in Westeros itself. Cersie's self-serving conceit is blinding the viewer.

I like the Hound from the show and Tyrions's sellsword buddy, Bron. I'm glad they had him training with Jaime instead of the guy with no tongue. In the books, there aren't any characters I would call a favorite. I like the story, the plots and political maneuvering, I care what happens to the characters because their success or failure has consequences for the bigger story.

Perhaps I (along with many others) are looking too deeply into the issue, but the theory my friends and I have come to accept for the explanation for Tywin's hate of Tyrion is that he hold suspicion of Tyrion's parentage: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqVhKOxmJCw The fading power of the Targaryens, demonstrated in the loss of dragons and falling prey to the consequences of generations of incest, would explain why he is very ugly (in the books, at least) and why he is so short.

There was a time when I wouldn't have missed a GoT episode... but at this point its gotten so bad I doubt I'll bother watching.

Hard Home was great... but the rest of the shows this season have been boring as all hell... and well... I'll tolerate inept assaults on my world view if they are at least of high quality and entertaining. Boring assaults on it however are not so tolerated.

I don't know, I thought Ned was somewhat clueless. Clearly he knew there were untrustworthy people, and that might be partly why he couldn't take Renly's offer that would have saved his life.. As for littlefingers, in the book he was a selfish climber, but you at least empathized with the guy a bit. In the series he hardly has any redeeming traits. Even his schemes are just his way of causing chaos to tear down those more powerful than he is to have some power (kinda gamma).

That's about when I got fed up too, though I kept plowing forward for a while out of stubbornness. I wasn't even that attached to Robb; I didn't think his character had been developed much. But the whole Red Wedding thing was so overdone, and also the beginning of the zombie foolishness. I've read explanations by people trying to make sense of it all, but they didn't help.

Also, from the beginning of the series, I've expected the wolves to mean something, so every time one dies pointlessly, it's like being promised that the future books won't be nearly as cool as they should have been.

I have only watched two seasons of the show, but in the books I always wanted more Tyrion and more dragons (even if the dragons came with Daenerys). Jon Snow seems like a pouty lout, Rob/Ned admirable, but clueless and Tywin the guy I would pick to lead my armies.

The character out of all of them that interested me the most was Jaimie, simply due to his internal battle with honor and serving his family.

Don't forget that Tyrion, despite his intelligence and wit, is pathetically Gamma. This wouldn't be so bad except it reminds Tywin of his father Tytos, whose fawning over a common woman nearly doomed the Lannister house to obscurity and contempt. Tywin didn't do all that work just to see Tyrion collapse at true leadership, and he also believes Jaime's oath to the Kingsguard is a joke. Given that Jaime is known as the Kingslayer, you can't blame him.

"Also, from the beginning of the series, I've expected the wolves to mean something, so every time one dies pointlessly, it's like being promised that the future books won't be nearly as cool as they should have been."

The wolves were also a huge piece of evidence to me that GRRM is just an asshole that likes tormenting his readers.

I mocked him for years for it while he was alive. He'd be disappointed to learn I stopped just because he died.

He'll be rolling over in his grave. Sobbing.

"Also, from the beginning of the series, I've expected the wolves to mean something, so every time one dies pointlessly, it's like being promised that the future books won't be nearly as cool as they should have been."

Yup. You think the plot will be driven by interesting characters developing a potential for greatness. Instead, it's driven by good characters stupidity and everyone else's venality

The wolves were also a huge piece of evidence to me that GRRM is just an asshole that likes tormenting his readers.

They are mostly an indication of Martin's fast approaching senility. They may have meant something at one time but he has long since lost track of it. They have done nothing to advance the plot. They could be ablated from the story line completely and you would never notice they were gone.

Love your analysis of Littlefinger, he's definitely up there on my favorites.

I've recently re-read the books and trying to rewatch the series and despite the recent episode of GoT, I am really, really leaning toward Stannis as the last thing close to an honorable man and one who is hell-bent on saving civlization even if he means he has no heirs and if he doesn't actually get to sit on the Iron Throne. He just wants to show he's the king and he's going to save everyone.

Any thoughts on him? I thought he was kind of a dry character when I was first introduced via just the show, but now a few years later I've re-evaulated him and find him to be my favorite character.

I'm not sure if my comments keep getting deleted or if Vox has to approve them first now.

I was making a comment about Stannis. I find him to be the one guy who is still the most admirable -- even he hasn't made a confession like Ned did at the end (who I loved dearly).

He truly believes himself to be the savior of the North and the rest of the kingdoms even if it comes at a price that kills everything else. From what I can tell of the books everything he's done in the show you could see coming.

I just respect the guy. Didn't like Episode 9 recently because it hurt, but it's Stannis, and we all knew it was coming.

Also, from the beginning of the series, I've expected the wolves to mean something, so every time one dies pointlessly, it's like being promised that the future books won't be nearly as cool as they should have been.

Yes! I hate what happened to the wolves.

Jon is my favorite character... mostly because he has the most interesting theories surrounding his character. And he's also honorable like Ned without being so overtly naive... and thus far, the only "Good" guy who has been left standing as "good" in both book and show.

Of course, next book could crush my delusion...

I really like Jaimie... like someone else mentioned, his internal struggle is interesting. I think he was sexually abused by his narcissistic sister as a child, developed an inappropriate attachment, and is now trying to find his way out... i sincerely hope he is the brother in Maggie the Frog's fortune reading of Cersei.

I actually was really enjoying book Cersei's POVs in DwD... her narcissism is unbelievable... and consistent. Her conversations with Kevan Lannister just made me cringe with how self-deluded she was.

As for Tywin, Jaime, and Tyrion, Jaimie is the reason Tywin can't dismiss the kingsguard vows... Jaimie won't let him... and it has been mentioned several times that out of all his children, Tyrion is the most like him...

George RapeRape Martin is just another Robert Jordan type, but more filled with left-wing hatred. So, instead of 40 pages of Nyneave tugging her braid, we get 40 pages of torture of any character expressing Western norms of honorable behavior.

What is depressing is that this shit has been given the first-rate production treatment, and Americans are finally seeing what real actors look and feel like when they are allowed to practice their craft as opposed to helping Marketing sell a brand.

However good the music, art direction, costumes and acting is though (and I agree that Tywin Lannister is by far an away the best character), the underlying material is just a gob of "transgressive" shite.

I like Tyrion. My favourite part out of the whole series was him taking care of business as the king's hand. Also he slapped that little bitch nephew of his. I don't like any of the female characters well enough to name a favourite. I do like watching the Mother of Eyebrows parts because dragons.

"How many boys dwell in Westeros? How many girls? How many men, how many women? The darkness will devour them all, she says. The night that never ends. She talks of prophecies . . . a hero reborn in the sea, living dragons hatched from dead stone . . . she speaks of signs and swears they point to me. I never asked for this, no more than I asked to be king. Yet dare I disregard her?” He ground his teeth. “We do not choose our destinies. Yet we must . . . we must do our duty, no? Great or small, we must do our duty."

A quote from Stannis that is part of what made his character honorable to me despite his imperfections -- he isn't as holy as Ned Stark, but he is just.

"How many boys dwell in Westeros? How many girls? How many men, how many women? The darkness will devour them all, she says. The night that never ends. She talks of prophecies . . . a hero reborn in the sea, living dragons hatched from dead stone . . . she speaks of signs and swears they point to me. I never asked for this, no more than I asked to be king. Yet dare I disregard her?” He ground his teeth. “We do not choose our destinies. Yet we must . . . we must do our duty, no? Great or small, we must do our duty."

(FYI this got deleted too after it showed up for a moment even after refreshing. Odd.)

That was apparent when he killed off Ned. Ned was a good guy...therefore he had to die.

I didn't like that, but I was okay with it, because sometimes the bad guys do win. It said this wasn't going to be the Belgariad, and that was fine. I liked Ned, but his death made sense in context -- that's exactly the sort of thing that could happen when an honorable man overestimates the honor of others and walks into a viper's nest. And at that point, it didn't feel like his story so much as the Stark kids' anyway (as I recall; it's been a while).

But bringing in the wolves, with one for each kid and the significance of it being their house symbol, was like waving a big flag saying "This Is Significant." They weren't just characters; they appeared to be part of the theme. If you don't want anything in your story to be Significant, that's fine, but then don't wave that flag. Surprises are fine, but the reader should never be thinking, "Well then what was all that about?" It's as if Frodo lost the ring right before he headed into Mordor and it was never seen again, or if Prothall healed Covenant's leprosy for good with the Staff of Law at the end of the first book. Then what would have been the point of all that setup? Just to screw with us?

Granted, the series isn't finished, and the surviving wolves may yet be Significant. But he may just kill them off in random accidents. Who knows?

“How many boys dwell in Westeros? How many girls? How many men, how many women? The darkness will devour them all,she says. The night that never ends. She talks of prophecies . . . a hero reborn in the sea, living dragons hatched from dead stone . . . shespeaks of signs and swears they point to me. I never asked for this, no more than I asked to be king. Yet dare I disregard her?” He groundhis teeth. “We do not choose our destinies. Yet we must . . . we must do our duty, no? Great or small, we must do our duty.

[The wolves] could be ablated from the story line completely and you would never notice they were gone.

It'd be an improvement, because you wouldn't be distracted thinking, "What about the wolves? Weren't there some wolves in this story at some point, that seemed kind of important? Really, another chapter of the dragon girl wandering through the desert, angsting about a throne she's never seen? What is this, Twilight? Give me wolves, dammit."

Bron's likeable to me because his lack of complexity is matched with honesty. He seems to be the most comfortable in his own skin. If he climbs, he climbs. If he falls, he falls. When Tyrion plays the friend angle, he reminds Tyrion that Tyrion's friendship was always conditional. He's the character (from the show) that I can best associate with, though I wouldn't go so far as to say we're completely alike.

Someone said John Snow is like Ned, but not as naïve. Not sure about that. He has his moments in which he allows his code to blind or bind him. Thus, "You know nothing, John Snow."

I honestly think George Rape Rape Martin rolls dice to determine who lives or dies, with the obvious exceptions. The deaths are too random to make thematic sense. The Red Wedding betrayal was such a clearly dumb move by an elder lord that it beggars belief.

Caitlyn's the most annoying character and the one death I welcomed. I don't know what her zombie character was like, but I can't see the role she'd play with her children scattered. The children would see her as an abomination, if there's any consistency in characters. Again, didn't read the book.

It seems like in season 5, the pace is really ramping up. Jonathan Pryce's character was introduced and promoted to pope in two episodes, and now they (finally) brought back the ice zombies and dragons in back-to-back episodes. I didn't know anything about the books but knowing that it's called A Song of Ice and Fire I would expect the end to be ice zombie vs dragons. And now that it's getting there, I'm thinking the end is nigh.

My issue with the wolves is similar. I can take and appreciate people dropping in and out of storylines without reasonable closure. Remember how there were so many open threads in The Sopranos? I actually liked it in The Sopranos, because it created tension with audience preconceived notions of narratives and plots.

However, introducing the wolves and killing them off randomly comes off as a ham-fisted approach to creating that tension.

Ned's death made sense because the audience had to be shocked out of "good guys win in the end" and introduced to the nihilism that dominates the realm. His death wasn't random. His death held significance to the reader and helped build a good tension in the series (honor and living by the golden rule offers no protection - you're on your own).

The lack of importance of the wolves when it was build up seems like he wanted to continue beating the drum of nihilism, but couldn't really think of a better way to do it.

I'd hate the guy in real life, but I could read the Jaime Lannister chapters all day - even now. They're about the only parts of the books I still find worthwhile. Which is why I'm pretty sure it'll be the next thing Martin shits on.

I stopped watching the show after the second season. I didn't feel like paying HBO subscription fees just to get it anymore, and I haven't really felt like shelling out for the Blu-Ray sets for the later seasons yet, either. If season 5 is as bad as everyone says, I really might not ever bother.

Also, after the tone he's taken regarding the puppies, I have very little interest in giving Mr. Martin any more of my money.

I liked Stannis Baratheon until this last week, but I think that was the whole point of GRRM--which is that everyone is ultimately bad and will do whatever it takes to try to win, except those that don't like Ned and they die instead.

The problem was that he had to do it for the story as otherwise he could have been written out of the show months ago. Of course if GRRM wanted a huge FU to his readers and audience he could have had him not do it, and then just quit the field and never be mentioned again in the story. I find that cruelly funny--write a character for many chapters and follow his exploits just to have him quit and disappear.

I actually was really enjoying book Cersei's POVs in DwD... her narcissism is unbelievable... and consistent.

I can't fault Martin's characterization on Cersei; she's a solid portrayal of an unbalanced, narcissistic woman in a position of great power (and really the one feminists should be offended by, if she's similar on TV). She's just not at all pleasant to spend time with, so when she takes over the books, it's too much. Get rid of at least half her scenes and she'd be much more enjoyable.

What is depressing is that this shit has been given the first-rate production treatment

Yes. I had a similar thought when a friend practically forced me to read the first Harry Potter book: "That's it? That's what all the excitement is about, and that's the book that got turned into big-budget movies?" It was okay, but nothing special; I got at least three better series for my penny when I first joined the SFBC.

However, I do remember reading GoT and thinking that it would be easy to turn into a screenplay. The way the short chapters switched through various points of view was a lot like a soap opera, checking in on each storyline for a bit, then hitting a cliffhanger and rotating on to the next. So maybe it's not that surprising.

I liked Stannis Baratheon until this last week, but I think that was the whole point of GRRM--which is that everyone is ultimately bad and will do whatever it takes to try to win, except those that don't like Ned and they die instead.

Honestly never got all the Stannis Fanboys (StanBoys?). He's a bit more likable in the show, portrayed as uncompromising but a good leader, but in the book he was just a churlish and splenetic, and required Davos to prevent him from making major miscalculations. He never seemed to care about the allies he so desperately needed, clinging to being convinced he was the chosen one. He just seesawed between being admirable and a brittle narcissist.

Honestly what they did in the show with Stannis was a classic GRRM move. Take a character you see people like, despite how you portrayed him and make it impossible for them to like him, just out of spite. It's like he punishes you for caring about the people in the book he doesn't want you to, then forces you to sit through POV chapters of characters you couldn't possible give a shit about.

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Davos at all. In the show and in the book he is one of my favorite characters. Here is a man who displays honor and loyalty, at least to the extant that he understands those concepts, even to the point of costing him his family. And Liam Cunningham does a great job with him. I am particularly interested in his reaction to Stannis' actions in the most recent episode of the show.

Bronn might be my favorite character of all to watch on the show. Jerome Flynn just owns it. The wise-cracking sellsword character might be a bit cliched, but he is fun to watch.

Many of the actors have done great work on the show, and I can appreciate that even when the story or character has been developed poorly. Ciaran Hinds was great as always, although I feel they downgraded Mance Rayder significantly from the book. Jonathon Price's subtlety has created depth in the character of the High Sparrow where there was not much there in the books. Conleth Hill, Charles Dance, Sean Bean, Ian Glen, Rory McCann, Aiden Gillien, Diana Rigg, Indira Varma, James Cosmo...all of them have really brought their characters to life. And of course Peter Dinklage has probably done more to make the show a success than anybody else.

I do feel that the show has killed a number of characters from the books, and not in the literal sense. Aereo Hotah always had great POV chapters, even if the events he witnessed were not that intriguing. And in the show they apparently felt the need to meet their racial quota with him and now he is simply a poor Michael Duncan Clarke clone.

I'll give Martin one thing, he creates great characters. The POV technique helps tremendously in developing characters, as he can explore their motivations and thought processes quickly and efficiently. Even many of the one-off prologue and epilogue characters have been interesting, and you can get invested in them in only a couple pages. But this is also his downfall, as he wants to create all these great characters and then the story gets bogged down with them all. But considering VD's recent article about what makes for great writing, Martin sells his work based on his characters even at the expense of story.

I agree with your view on Littlefinger. The only disagreement I have so far with the show, and this could just be another ploy of his, but his complete lack of knowledge with regards to Ramsey Snow. I found it really unlikely that someone as connected and knowledgeable as Littlefinger, would not know about Ramsey's reputation.

Again, this could have been a ploy and we may find out that it is all part of his plan.

Peter Dinklage is worth it by himself. Looking at earlier scenes of him I wonder if they are aging him on the show or he's using test or something. I love his character and how he plays it. More interesting than the book.

I liked Ned while he was around as well as Rob. Cersi and Jaime are interesting together not so much apart. She's turned boring. The actress wasn't as pretty as I imagined her to be but she made up for it.

The hand and Arya were good together. More dragons, Sam, Jon, and walkers.

The wolves were also a huge piece of evidence to me that GRRM is just an asshole that likes tormenting his readers.

They are mostly an indication of Martin's fast approaching senility. They may have meant something at one time but he has long since lost track of it. They have done nothing to advance the plot. They could be ablated from the story line completely and you would never notice they were gone.

The only disagreement I have so far with the show, and this could just be another ploy of his, but his complete lack of knowledge with regards to Ramsey Snow.

(My opinion is based on series)

I'm sure he knows. Ramsey Snow's not a threat and holds little to no power.

He's a bully with no sense of self-purpose. No one will rally to arms if he dies (maybe his father, but I get the sense his father would look for a pragmatic solution, such as a payoff, and have more children).

Littlefinger doesn't need to maneuver carefully to take him out of the picture if he presents a threat.

As far as Sansa, the guy runs whorehouses. He doesn't need her to be a virgin and wouldn't mind if she is converted into a female Reek.

Ogre: I think Davos suspected what Stannis might do and that that was the reason he was being sent for supplies. He did try to remain and have someone else go. I thought the show did a great job of subtly implying that he knew what was coming.

I feel like GoT is a strange beast. There are so, so many characters and situations which are well-acted and semi-compelling in the moment, but utterly uninteresting in terms of the overall story.

Who cares about Jorah Mormont at this point? Why is he still there? Why were we following Tyrion after his exile? Why have we spent so much time with Ditznerys? Who cares about every moment of Sansa's life? So much could've been caught up on in a couple of lines of dialogue once each character started mattering again.

I've really turned on Tyrion and Sansa this season. The former is whiny and boring now, despite Dinklage being a great actor. Had Tyrion had any skill at politics it would've been great to watch. Sansa is just obnoxious; she's planning to murder Ramsay, but she's upset that he likes rough sex? That's far from the worst thing he could be doing to her. She ought to suck it up and appreciate that her situation could be a lot worse, and besides, she chose it. Few people deal with Littlefinger and come off so easy.

Does anyone else hate Dany? She's a ditzy idiot. If she had the throne for five minutes she'd be assassinated instantly. I miss Tywin, he was the only one who seemed to know what he was doing. Even Stannis seems pretty decent compared with everyone else.

Finally, I feel like I'm enjoying the Sparrows cleaning out the sodomites a lot more than I'm expected to by the showrunners. I think maybe I'm supposed to hate them? But they're actually honest, take their vows and religion seriously, and are challenging the aristocrats to live up to their supposed superiority. It's like watching Hollywood celebrities go before the Inquisition; I've enjoyed it greatly. I'm not sure how I'm supposed to feel about it by the show -- how is that handled in the book? Are the Sparrows more unlikeable there?

As a social observer just trying to piece together the fascination with various aspects of popular culture that used to be verboten (and for good reason I might add), I am perplexed that males in our society embrace activities that are anathema to what a real man is.

Also, does Dany having essentially modern views on slavery seem weird? I wish there was some character reason given for this (on the show at least). It just seems convenient, a way to make us like her, and a way for the author to like and identify with her more. But a person who lives in the world she lives in simply wouldn't have that view unless there was some specific reason. Nobody ever had that view, at least that we know of, until recent times, as far as I know.

Is this explained in detail in the books in some way? They just seem to take it for granted in the show.

NateM, you and apparently a whole lot of others on this site watch the shows with men having sex with men, not me. You read the books with men having sex with men, not me.

I am perplexed as to why this collection of alpha males (dread ilk) obsesses on media that depicts males inserting their penises in the orifices of other males.

That is what is curious and prompts me to want to understand. Possibly, since you are all dominant alphas, it is a throwback to the Greek Warriors who were obsessed with pre-pubescent boys? Or possibly the gay Nazi's SS Stormtroopers who were hyper-masculine but preferred other men to women?

Bah - I also lost interest in the books after the Red Wedding. Got to asking myself how much more time I wanted to spend inside GRRM's head.

That said, I think GRRM presents as an interesting mix of narcissism and nihilism, at least as far as these books go. Personally, I think the series could end up being one big troll of all the readers. Remember his quote - "No one will be alive by the last book. In fact, they all die in the fifth. The sixth book will be just a thousand-page description of snow blowing across the graves ..." (I realize we have the fifth book now, though I haven't read it...the 4th was the last one I made myself slog through)

What if Dany's vision in the House of the Undying, of the Iron Throne in a ruined hall with no people, covered in snow, was his foreshadowing that the Night King and the dead army will win? It would be legendary as trolling goes and I completely think it's within him to do it.

NateM, it comes from standing poised over his Mexican workers all day as they toil in the hot sun. He tried to relieve the tension by offering to apply sunscreen for them, but they just looked at him funny, said, "No habla," and walked away. So try to be understanding; he's a little frustrated.

Owen, I thought this was a discussion about Game of Thrones? I thought a big draw for the show was their groundbreaking indulgence and cinematic portrayal of gay male sex? I have seen it mentioned on Drudge, Fox, etc. Didn't pique my interest by has possibly captured some of your fascination with the show? Just wondering.

Cali Corishev, you watch shows with male gay sex scenes on prominent display, I question that, and you project on to me your hidden desires and accuse me...

I am just curious how such dominant alpha males (the hyper-masculine dread ilk) reconcile the fact that they see men having sex with other men on a regular basis and tout the very media that delivers the sex scenes to the public (and small children across America)?

"Having never read one word of the series and having seen only part of one episode, are scenes with men penetrating other men or fellating another man a regular occurrence?"

define regular. isn't once to much? Its not regular any more... but I would say at one point there was a 50 50 chance of a gay sex scene showing up in the show. there hasn't been any at all this season though... as all the fags are either dead or in jail.

no this year its kiddy sex.

the show really is repugnant. to the point that you can't even skip through it on a dvr anymore.

Tiny's dumbassery aside, I don't remember any homo stuff in the books, except the rumor about Renly, for which he was naturally ridiculed. I definitely don't remember any on-screen man-on-man stuff. Have I just blocked it out of my mind, or is this another case of Hollywood inserting it in everywhere it doesn't belong?

In the real world, (some) men insert their penises into (other) men. Some into goats.

Are you really advocating that sensible people should turn away from reality because we dislike it? That is the essence of gammatude, an irrational emoting response.

men deal with reality as it is, and have a natural interest in discovering what is really so. As Mr Wright observed earlier, we believe that truth is beauty (not that all facts are beautiful but that truth itself is beauty - grok the distinction before you make another heedlessly revealing blunder).

Men endure what cannot be appreciated nor altered, but we do not deny it nor turn away from reality itself.

the debauchery in the books is... different. but I skipped so much of the books that I can't swear its not there. When that shit starts on TV or in a book... I either stop and never return or skip the section and move on as if it didn't happen. It I find myself skipping to often... I just quit entirely. Which I did with both this show and the books.

As for me, I will not support it in any way, shape or form. You watch it therefore you support it. I refuse to support it and cut right to the chase on the issue at every opportunity.

If someone says, "oh, they (two men) make such a handsome couple". I respond "what is it about a man putting a penis in another man's anus or mouth that you find appealing and support". Then I get "ooh, your so sick and gross you pervert".

Ok, so the show has had what, 49 episodes so far? Average running time of 50-55 mins. We're talking ~2500-2600 mins of running time thus far. and how many minutes of that running time consisted of gay stuff? Maybe 1/2 of 1 percent. Now do you see why I assume you're fixating Tiny?

You state gay sex constitutes .5% of the total screen time of the show.

How many children under the age of ten were exposed to gay sex on game of thrones for the first time?

If it is one child that is one too many in my book. And I am willing to bet it is tens of thousands of young boys who have been exposed. Even if they came there for the nude women, they saw the dudes banging each other.

As for what I do Nate to subvert the NWO, I plea the fifth as is my right.

The point is, moron, you are 99x more likely to encounter something other than that while watching the show, yet you fixate completely on that. So I'd guess it's an obsession, or perhaps overcompensating. Hell, you're at least twice as likely to see a rape, or 10x as likely to see a murder, but yet the buggering is the thing you just can't get out of your head, isn't it? I can imagine now, you in front of the tv, blustering with your unexplained boner. It's ok Tiny, the Queer Party Friends are waiting for your application

I wouldn't pretend to know what % of the screen time was acutally gay sex. Generally the sex scenes in the show last mere seconds. for the talk about gay sex being shown... I can only think of one scene.. and it wasn't actually shown at all.

Yes Davos suspected something might go down, but I wouldn't go so far as to say he knew that what happened was what was going to happen. I don't think he thought they would kill her, as that was never done with Gendry. He risked himself to save Gendry (Edric Storm in the books), and he had no relation with him. He had a strong bond with Shireen. And I imagine Davos' moral code would consider filicide to be unacceptable under any circumstance.

In the books its clear Davos is not completely sold on the Red God. He is a man who believes what he sees, his moral code is simple and straight forward--thats part of what makes us like him. He doesn't see everything in black and white, but there are some definite lines one does not cross. He has seen what the Red God is capable of doing, that there is some power there that has real tangible effects, and he does appreciate that. But he has also witnessed many getting burned alive, and he was not at all comfortable with that. I think in the books he still harbors faith for the Seven, although he hides it, and is somewhat conflicted.

In any event, I think show Davos will have serious issues with what happened to Shireen. I'm looking forward to his reaction more than any other aspect of the show right now. This could be one of the few things that could break his loyalty to Stannis.

Along those lines, I found it interesting how in the previous episode Tyrion explains to Dragongirl how killing those who are devoted to you does not inspire devotion. And then Stannis goes and brutally kills one who was completely devoted to him...

Mate.. you could remove all homosexuality from GoT... and letting any 10 year old watch it would still be child abuse.

Lol... yes. I have 3 kids now... the only one who has been in the room with it on has been the 2 week old.

The books didn't have that in it. There was some hint that Oberyn and dornish men (and women) had "fluid" sexuality, but I completely missed any implication in the books that Renly and the Knight of Flowers were goin' at it. With the name, i probably shoulda got the hint, but it certainly wasn't broadcast like the show.

There was just Dany and one of her hand maids & Cersei and Oberyn's lover? Can't remember...

@eidolon Also, does Dany having essentially modern views on slavery seem weird?

Yes, that seems a bit weird to me as well. Perhaps I missed it in an earlier ep but why is she in Mereen anyways? To free the slaves and that's it? I thought she wanted to go to westeros. something just seems off with her unless I'm missing something.

"Enjoy the show and ignore the scene with the man with his penis in the other man's rectum. The next scene shows a dragon and a sword fight between two warriors."

again.. you're jabbering about something you have never scene. Which makes you look like an idiot to those that have.

There are no scenes of that nature in the show that I recall. The gay stuff is almost entire limited to two fags laying in bed together talking. Which... yes.. is repugnant... but its not what you're describing and its much easier to ignore.

like I said... at some point we all have lines... GoT was begining to cross mine weeks ago but this last episode was just beyond the pale.

You're correct to say its desensitizing. It is. But whoever told you the show was Will and Grace style gay propoganda fed you a line of bullshit. Most of the gays on the show are depicted completely differently than the gay rights crowd would prefer. They are shown as weak and without morals in some cases... and just as total perverts who were less "gay" than just totally without care about who or what they stuck their dick in. Less than an animal when it came to sex.

In other words... the depiction of the gays were fairly realistic... not a sugar coated version.

I tolerate many things I despise. Life itself is a mongrel mix of good and evil.

Tolerating my own existence is not an endorsement of the evil I see, or indeed have done.

One of my favourite lines from any work of fiction is this:

"There is yet love in the world."

And yet I have little to nothing in common, spiritually or politically, with the author of these words. I suspect that behind your obsession with demonising anyone who doesn't share your exact dogmatic adherence to your own opinions, is a presumption that you are less evil than other people.

That presumption will be the death of you, unless you rid yourself of it.

(I'm not asking you, btw, to watch or read GoT; just in case you missed that.)

Scuzzaman, I am human and deserve hell. I am not elevated above or below anyone as Jesus has made it clear my best works or nothing but dirty, filthy rags.

I am the lowest of the low and the worst of the worst at times. My struggle is to be better than my earthly self, and for which I fail miserably on a regular basis.

I have been wiped clean according to my Lord. Only through Christ am I worthy of one second of life. Of that I am certain.

I have squandered most of my blessings and fail to live up to my own standards several times a day.

I care about the children and their sexualization at a young age. I will have no part in their destruction.

We are all a vessel to be filled. We can fill this vessel with good or we can fill this vessel with evil.

The two cannot exist together. That is a law of the universe. I mix the two regularly and it causes angst for which I struggle and fight back in an attempt to exist in the light more than I dwell in the darkness.

If it were only available to adults, and they so choose to watch it, I really don't care. When it is accessible to children, which I guarantee it is all across the globe, as Jesus said, those who perpetrate evil against the children will wish they were never born.

If I go back and think... of the hundred or so characters on the show... the gay ones are...

Renly (who was a weak little wanna be who died)

Loras (another wanna be prince.. a good fighter but a bad combination of dumb and naive and totally unable to control himself)

Oberon.. who was the one I was talking about when I said he wasn't so much gay as just a pervert. he was obsessed with sex in all forms. Just a freak. And he had his head popped like a watermellon at a gallagher show.

The gay prostitue? also totally without morals... not a single redeeming quality about him.

That's all I can think of.

The show is hardly gay positive. I'm honestly kind of surprised it doesn't get flack for depicting gays as stereotypical fairey boys.

"If it were only available to adults, and they so choose to watch it, I really don't care. When it is accessible to children, which I guarantee it is all across the globe, as Jesus said, those who perpetrate evil against the children will wish they were never born."

judging by my wife's complaints... I don't think you're exaggerating. She used to watch the soaps quite a bit... but stopped completely. Apparently they don't more than a few minute without showing guys making out.

If you search gay porn, I am sure you know what is going to pop up. If you are a child and watching a show on TV and the next thing you know there are two men going at it, then you were baited up with the swords and dragons, then provided some gay male sex scenes as a trauma to induce?

If you are a child and watching a show on TV and the next thing you know there are two men going at it, then you were baited up with the swords and dragons, then provided some gay male sex scenes as a trauma to induce?

What part of Game of Thrones isn't a show for child don't you understand?

Go complain about the gay characters on ABC Family or something. Those are shows that kids actually watch.

Nate, like I said, I don't have TV. Sure they still get exposed as they live in America and go to the store, but they don't walk in on their dad watching it and having to fumble with the remote while yelling "not appropriate".

My children also know their dad is a reformed reprobate (by my own words). They don't know details, but they know temptation lures everyone including me, and that it sometimes ends in death.

The number one reason why white people like not having a TV is so that they can tell you that they don’t have a TV.

On those lonely nights when white people wish they could be watching American Idol, Lost, or Grey’s Anatomy, they comfort themselves by thinking of how when people talk about the show tomorrow they can say “I didn’t see it, I don’t have a TV. That stuff rots your brain.”

It is effective in making other white people feel bad, and making themselves feel good about their life and life choices.

Finally, I feel like I'm enjoying the Sparrows cleaning out the sodomites a lot more than I'm expected to by the showrunners.

They might find themselves in the same position as A&E who made Duck Dynasty to just to make fun of rednecks only to find a huge following for reasons they didn't like.

No love for the Hound? Y'all are just jealous because he's better looking than you.

He is an interesting character who decided to stop fighting for other people & even protects someone planning to kill him. Despite being the 2nd strongest man in Westeros isn't he dying after getting beaten up by superpussy? If he was still in the game he would be a good pick.

Tiny Tim Are you Tim Gideon and if so do you still work at the gap? If so he looks like Jeofry but slightly more sane, and scrapes his teeth.

Generally the sex scenes in the show last mere seconds. for the talk about gay sex being shown Now we get to the reason I stopped dating the Tim mentioned before.

" I thought a big draw for the show was their groundbreaking indulgence and cinematic portrayal of gay male sex? "

Did you never have cable before? Have you never heard of Federico Fellini?

Josh, it is available daily in 500 million homes. I doubt seriously every child self polices.

What don't you understand?

I agree with the daytime TV. That is why we don't have it.

My Son doesn't wear skinny jeans and act like a woman. He is taller and stronger than me and out shoots me with both pistol and rifle. He also like girls and looks at boys who are gender confused and shakes his head. My daughters as well. Yesterday they were at vacation Bible school and one of the ladies asked the boys to kill it. They all pranced around squealing and wouldn't get within 10 feet of it. My daughter picked it up with a paper towel and threw it outside. She couldn't believe the little cowboys were so feminine. It really shocked her. No kidding.

I have to remind him that many have been damaged pre-natal by environmental estrogens and can't help their confusion. They are stuck between man and woman. That is only fair to cut the little fairies some slack. Especially if it is through no fault of their own.

He is an interesting character who decided to stop fighting for other people & even protects someone planning to kill him. Despite being the 2nd strongest man in Westeros isn't he dying after getting beaten up by superpussy? If he was still in the game he would be a good pick.

IIRC didn't he get an infection and that's why he couldn't fight anymore?

"If you search gay porn, I am sure you know what is going to pop up. If you are a child and watching a show on TV and the next thing you know there are two men going at it, then you were baited up with the swords and dragons, then provided some gay male sex scenes as a trauma to induce?"

Doesn't happen. I've never seen that on GoT. As josh pointed out... you're more likely to see gay men making out on ABC Family than you are on GoT.

It is frustrating though. I mean shouldn't I be able to watch a football game on tv with my kid without a commercial showing up that would've been rated R in 1981? That'd be nice.

Ya can't lock them in the closet. if ya hide to much you end up making them curious about it all and then you've done more harm than good. its a tough time to raise kids man. its a tough time to be a kid.

I'll be honest... i don't worry about my kids turning gay. I don't agree completely that gay kids are recruited. They obviously are recruited... but I believe they are recruited from a subset of men... a specific subset. Those who basically had no father figure in their lives at all.

Just my experience... but every gay dude i've ever met... none of them had a relationship with their fathers at all. I don't mean their dads were mean to them. I mean they had no dad.

So...given that... I don't worry about my kids turning gay because they saw something gay. That doesn't mean I allow them to see it. They honestly have no idea what gay is. they are farm kids... they know exactly how things work... and it doesn't work like that.

I'm confident that if my kids where to see two men kissing it would have the same effect on them it has on me and you Tim. They'd be disgusted.

If you are really worried about gays touching little kids minds you should be more worried about common core and gay teachers like.http://www.gaypatriot.net/2015/04/29/lesbian-teacher-uses-math-class-to-indoctrinate-pre-teens-in-gay-issues-and-social-justice/http://www.queerty.com/can-we-please-just-start-admitting-that-we-do-actually-want-to-indoctrinate-kids-20110512/#ixzz2qWrjWAO6

and this teacher is complaining about guys from San Fran going after his kids http://eagnews.org/black-teacher-slams-white-privilege-training-they-are-hurting-black-kids/ . There is a common core approved coloring book that has pictures of boys in dresses. Best link I could find other than Stormfront, some of the old links seem to be taken down.https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.633925179979514.1073741831.145318588840178&type=1

I think Tim is taking it to the extreme but on the broader point he is correct to note that most parents treat infants like lumps of meat rather than the tiny humans they are.

talk to them exactly like you would an adult. People thought I was crazy when they would see me doing it... but when my 2 year olds talked to them a year later they would gape at the vocabulary.

I did the same. I don't know when they start "getting" it... and its likely different for each child.

And I won't deny being uncomfortable with some of the stuff we've watched in the last week while i have been feeding him, but I'm pretty confidant that at this point, being exposed to what i'm watching while he's eating isn't going to have a lasting impact.

"And I won't deny being uncomfortable with some of the stuff we've watched in the last week while i have been feeding him, but I'm pretty confidant that at this point, being exposed to what i'm watching while he's eating isn't going to have a lasting impact."

meh. don't worry to much about it. I don't think its nearly as big a deal as Tim is making it out to be.

And remember, you can raise kids in the same house and they can turn out completely different in many ways. Be Christian, be consistent, but remember that there are a million moving parts that make up your children's experience every day.

Control for as many as you can, but the hyper-ventilating some parents do leads to "helicopter parenting."

I think GRRM's fatal plotting error is having Stannis lose the Battle of the Blackwater. This forces the story to contract in book 3 to tie up loose plot threads when it should instead continue to expand up until book 4 or so. Instead the story basically ends in book 3 and GRRM has to grope for new plot threads in books 4 and 5, hence all the garbage with the Ironborn and Young Griff and the Meereenese and the Dornish for that matter, none of whom the audience cares about. Book 3 depicting a 3-way struggle between Tywin, Stannis, and Robb sounds much more interesting to me than the bayoneting of the losers (Robb and Stannis).

Also, most of the characters are so devoid of moral fiber that the audience naturally latches on to anyone with a code or sense of nobility, hence the popularity of Stannis, the Hound, even Jaime, etc, despite their prominent flaws. I hated Cersei's chapters though.

Also, the contrast in homosexuality depicted in books vs the show bears noting. The books have two depicted homosexual encounters (Danaerys and Irri, Cersei and Taena Merryweather), and an implication that Renly and Loras had an intimate, though not necessarily sexual, relationship. In the show, there are no lesbian relationships or encounters, and the gay pairings are depicted rather than implied and such pairings are public knowledge to all characters ("Everyone in the kingdoms knows Renly was a sword-swallower through and through!", etc).

My expectation going into the TV adaptation would have been that the lesbianism would be ramped up and the gayness downplayed, for obvious reasons. Clearly such an expectation would have been wrong.

Tyrion is not only the Mad King's son but exactly like Aerys the 2nd. If you think about it who s the most interesting character really? Aerys the 2nd. We are teased about him constantly but we never get to really know what he was like and therefore the real story of Robert's rebellion. Everyone thinks they knew what happened but they didn't know the Mad King personally so nobody really knows the full details of what really happened. But if you accept that Tyrion is just like his father Aerys then the hows and whys of the rebellion will make sense.

Its like hearing a story about an old friend who got in a fight. You instinctively will know what happened because you'll know where his buttons are. You'll understand what Tywin's relationship was like with King Aerys; much like Tyrion's with Tywin's and also with Jamie. Jamie is just a younger version of Tywin but Tywin was able to shelter him for so long. He got spoiled and therefore stupid just like Rhaegar. John is basically just Rhaegar II but he was NOT spoiled and therefore learns discipline over love and comfort. If you accept that the exact same people are being born over and over again (often within the next generation) you'll understand the overall pattern of Game of Thrones and what it is. It's the story of these people and one cycle. Once you know one cycle you know them all. Its the same game over and over and over again. People just change seats.

George is actually writing an amazing work. Why he can't apply the lessons from it to real life is beyond me.

Oh and you'll also understand what a five star gutpunch awful insult it is to Tywin to compare him to Aerys/Tyrion to himself. A man that raped his wife. Well... not 100% sure it was rape. Aerys was a rapist but Johanna was just like Cerci. So lets make a chart.

Team Lannister with Jamie and TywinDestroyed the other's family.IncestMurderScrewed the other's slut wifeMarried a SlutTalks about Legitimacy and pure lineage and legacy but literally a bunch of bastards.Murdered the other's father.RegicideRape as a means of vengeanceKilled your own slut wife Tries to be Alpha and thinks he's Alpha but has some really cringe worthy beta moments.

Targaryen With Aerys and Tyrion Destroyed the other's family.IncestMurderScrewed the other's slut wifeMarried a SlutTalks about Legitimacy and pure lineage and legacy but literally a bunch of bastards.Murdered the other's father.RegicideRape as a means of vengeanceKilled your own slut wife Tries to be Alpha and thinks he's Alpha but has some really cringe worthy beta moments.

But the truth is the two families are TOTALLY DIFFERENT! Like England and America. Or Night and Day. Or Chocolate and Vanilla. As opposed to England and French Toast. Night and opium. Chocolate and NAMBLA.

68. Blogger Corvinus"Not just the wolves. Bran the cripple also comes to mind."

Bran is the character I'm most interested in. He is the one person who has a direct connection to the Old Gods, and is the opposite of the upstart Red Witch and her Lord of Light. There is something very ominous and evil about the Red Witch, if that wasn't obvious before the sacrifice of Shireen. I get the feeling the Lord of Light is actually a demon. I admit that there are more compelling characters than Bran, but he has very interesting plot implications.The Wolves don't bother me much, as I never expected much from them. They are a gimmick; a deus ex machina, like when one suddenly appeared to save Sam. Actually, I feel the same about the dragons, after Dany's miraculous save last week. Did she call the dragon with her magic powers, or did it use its dragon-sense? LOL

I find Stannis and Tywin to be very similar: powerful, sober men who do what must be done to further their goals without sentimentality. Stannis is more resentful in his role though, and is gloomier as a result. Tywin owned it, even if exercising power wasn't a 24/7 party.That's why characters like Ned and Robb got killed: their goodness was preyed upon by unscrupulous types. Only the Stannises and Tywins have any hope of survival.

Approaching from the standpoint of a fellow member within this trade, I really enjoy Nitroxin your write-up. I've constantly been in in actual fact like with this trade all my life so I've developed a discussion board for marketplace specialists to come together and discuss all things in this business.http://www.strongmenmuscle.com/nitroxin/